Control of the Mall’s Union Square changes hands

Control of the Mall’s Union Square changes hands

Union Square, the photogenic parcel of the Mall that the National Park Service had
envisioned as a First Amendment demonstration space, is quietly being
transferred to the jurisdiction of the Architect of the Capitol.

Park Service officials, who historians say have had
jurisdiction over the 11-acre square since the 1930s, were surprised by
the action.

The service had long-range plans for the square to be
turned into a multi-use area for demonstrations, gatherings and
entertainment. And the Trust for the National Mall is in the midst of a competition for the redesign of the square and other parts of the Mall.

The
spending bill states: “To the extent that the Director of the National
Park Service has jurisdiction and control over any portion of the area . . .
and any monument or other facility which is located within such area,
such jurisdiction and control is hereby transferred to the Architect of
the Capitol.”

Although definitions of what constitutes the Mall
vary, the provision, in a sense, moves its easternmost boundary west —
from First Street to Third Street.

The Architect of the Capitol,
which oversees the infrastructure of the Capitol complex, said in a
statement it was ready “to assume responsibility of the care and
maintenance of Union Square . . . as well as present an impressive and proper transition to Capitol Hill from the National Mall.”

“We
really don’t know what prompted it,” David Barna, the Park Service’s
chief spokesman, said of the change. “It caught us by surprise, but we
will work to transfer this to them as seamlessly as possible.”

But
an attorney who specializes in First Amendment matters said she found
the handover “very, very disturbing” and said the move could limit
demonstrations there.

“I find it extremely troubling,” said Mara
Verheyden-Hilliard, of the Washington-based Partnership for Civil
Justice, which advocates for protest groups. “This is an area that is acknowledged as a key area for demonstration activities.

“The
Park Service rules and obligations on First Amendment activities have
been forged by 40 years of very intense litigation,” she said.

The transfer, she said, would move law enforcement authority in the square to the Capitol Police.

“The Capitol Police . . . permitting system, I would have to say in my own experience . . .
is perhaps among the most arbitrary and restrictive,”
Verheyden-Hilliard said. “If they’re going to be expanding their
jurisdiction out into areas that have been used historically by people,
they are inviting litigation.”

Historians noted that the square
was for many years prior to the 1930s part of the Capitol complex. And
the Senate sergeant at arms, who supported the provision, said the
square has long needed to be brought under the Capitol’s security
umbrella.

The move came “largely out of security-driven issues,”
said Terrance W. Gainer, the Senate’s chief law enforcement officer.
Gainer has also been chief of the Capitol Police and a top official with
D.C. police.

“I do not think the area has benefitted from
security enhancements that have gone on, not only on [Capitol] Hill but
throughout Washington D.C.,” he said. “And those are needed.”

He
lamented the past need to use cement blocks and large vehicles as
security barriers in the area. “We can enhance security in a much more
aesthetic way,” he said. “And it completes, in my opinion, the grounds
of the hill.”

Gainer added that the area is one where, previously,
three police jurisdictions intersected — U.S. Park Police, Capitol
Police and the D.C. police.

Asked if Capitol authorities had been worried about demonstrations there, Gainer said:

“Our
concern isn’t that there would be demonstrations there, because I think
we were pretty darn good at handling First Amendment demonstration
issues on the hill.

“Maybe this is a transfer without huge
distinction,” he said. “I think our millions of visitors probably think
less about who the landlord is of a particular piece, and they just want
access and beauty and some of the amenities that need to come along
with it.”

He added that he was “empathetic to the Architect of the Capitol.”

“When
you get a new piece of property, it requires more work to upkeep it,”
he said. “I hope eventually funds will be available to make it look
nicer.”

Indeed, the Park Service planned to replace the rundown
reflecting pool with a different water feature and to refurbish and
repair the weathered Grant Memorial.

There was no timetable for either project.

Caroline
L. Cunningham, president of the nonprofit Trust for the National Mall,
which raises funds for Mall maintenance and improvements, said the
trust’s design competition for Union Square would go forward. “Our goal
is to design a beautiful and useful and sustainable space,” she said.